Miles v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
12-254
Fed. Cl.Oct 30, 2017Background
- Petitioner Mark Miles filed a Vaccine Act petition (on behalf of his son J.M.) alleging the October 1, 2009 seasonal influenza vaccine triggered a relapse of chronic recurrent nephrotic syndrome; case filed April 18, 2012.
- Extensive record development and expert exchange: petitioner relied primarily on immunology expert Dr. Bellanti and nephrology expert Dr. Quan; respondent offered opposing expert reports (e.g., Dr. Levinson, Dr. Kaplan).
- Case was pending >5 years and an entitlement hearing was scheduled for October 17, 2017. No entitlement decision had been issued when interim costs were requested.
- On August 30, 2017 petitioner sought interim attorneys’ costs of $79,034.50 and personal costs of $25,438.65 (no attorneys’ fees requested at that time).
- Respondent deferred to the special master’s discretion and raised no specific objections to awarding interim fees; special master evaluated good faith, reasonable basis, and reasonableness of billed costs.
- Special Master Millman awarded $58,144.84 in attorneys’ interim costs (payable to petitioner and counsel jointly) and $21,216.65 in petitioner’s personal costs, reducing certain expert and life‑care planner charges as unreasonable.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether interim attorneys’ fees/costs are appropriate under the Vaccine Act | Requested interim costs as protracted litigation with costly experts created undue hardship; case pending long time and hearing scheduled | Deferred to special master to determine appropriateness under Avera/Shaw | Interim award appropriate: good faith and reasonable basis found; proceedings sufficiently protracted/unducing hardship to justify interim award |
| Whether petitioner met "good faith" and "reasonable basis" standard for fee entitlement | Medical records show relapses; three expert reports (Dr. Quan) supported causation theory | Respondent raised no contrary contention on good faith/reasonable basis | Petitioner entitled to presumption of good faith; reasonable basis satisfied given records and expert support |
| Whether Dr. Bellanti’s charges (hours and $500/hr rate) were reasonable | Sought $26,275 (52.55 hours at $500/hr) for immunology work | Respondent did not specifically contest amounts but special master reviewed invoices and timeline | Reduced rate to $400/hr and eliminated hours billed before Dr. Bellanti’s documented retention; allowed 13.3 hours => $5,320 awarded |
| Whether life‑care planner fees were reasonable | Sought $24,222 without itemized hours/rate | Respondent did not specifically contest but special master required detail and compared to prior awards | Reduced to 80 hours at $250/hr => $20,000 awarded; allowed supplementation after final decision |
Key Cases Cited
- Avera v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 515 F.3d 1343 (Fed. Cir.) (interim fee awards permissible; particularly appropriate where litigation is protracted and costly experts are required)
- Shaw v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 609 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir.) (interim fees appropriate where litigation costs impose undue hardship and claim has good‑faith basis)
- Sebelius v. Cloer, 133 S. Ct. 1886 (U.S.) (statutory standard for award of fees/costs under Vaccine Act requires good faith and reasonable basis)
- Perreira v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 27 Fed. Cl. 29 (Fed. Cl.) (reasonableness requirement applies to both attorneys’ fees and other costs)
- McKellar v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 101 Fed. Cl. 297 (Fed. Cl.) (reasonable‑basis inquiry is objective and considers totality of circumstances)